December 21, 1999

Subject: About the full moon and Robert Cohen's crusade against the FDA and GMO & much much more

Hello everyone

After a few days break, I'm trying to catch up with everything - not easy!

So I will be quick. Here is some timely information, that you should look at immediately if you can. And you'll find an example of someone who has decided to dedicate himself entirely to stopping the poisoning of our food supply.

And please have a thought and send some spiritual succour to our brothers and sisters in rain-soaked Venezuela

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator


Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999
Subject: Re: Bright Future Beyond the Y2Kurve
From: "Ralf Gerlach"

Hello Jean:

Your reports are great. I wait paciently for them. Please keep up with it.

As a Venezuelan citizen I would like to ask you a special favor:

We went trough a heavy flood all last week. we have created a page to colaborate with the people in Venezuela. This time it was really bad. I would like to know if you can mention it in your next report. The page is as follow:

Thanks very much in advance


Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999
From: Richard Dannelley <>

Do you have a "inner belief" that peace and healing can come to our planet
through the combined mental energies of millions of humans?

An important moment is upon us; December 21 and 22, 1999.

Next week's winter solstice is the "ZERO POINT" in a cycle of alignments with
the Galactic plane that began in 1987 and ends in 2012. It has also been 133
years since a full moon occurred on a solstice.

The solstice and full moon event on December 21, and 22 is a very important
"programming" point for the group consciousness of our plant, this is one of
the most important moments for prayers of peace.

The moment is here.

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999
From: Jim Fournier <>
Subject: Galactic alignment with the New Moon on the Solstice

Please pass this on as widely as possible to anyone who
might be interested before the New Moon on the Solstice
at: 9:30am PST = 12:30pm EST = 17:30 UT on Dec 22, 1999.

There's a very nice explanatory graphic on the site.

Subj: Big Moon
Date: Saturday, December 11, 1999

Major beauty in the night December 22

This year will be the first full Moon to occur on the winter solstice,
December 22, commonly called the first day of winter. Since a full Moon
on the winter solstice occurred in conjunction with a lunar perigee
(point in the Moon's orbit that is closest to Earth) the Moon will
appear about 14 percent larger than it does at apogee (the point in it's
elliptical orbit that is farthest from the Earth).
And since the Earth is also several million miles closer to the Sun at
this time of the year than in the summer, sunlight striking the Moon is
about seven percent stronger making it brighter.

Also, this will be the closest perigee of the Moon of the year since the
Moon's orbit is constantly deforming. If the weather is clear and there
is snow cover where you live, it is believed that even car headlights
will be superfluous.

On December 21, 1866, the Lakota Sioux took advantage of this
combination of occurrences and staged a devastating retaliatory ambush
on soldiers in the Wyoming Territory.

In laymen's terms it will be a super bright full Moon, much more than
the usual AND it hasn't happened this way for 133 years! Our ancestors
133 years ago saw this. Our descendants 100 or so years from now will
see this again. We hope you post this on your calendar and note it as a
special Christmas season event!

Remember this will happen December 22, 1999.......

From: "selena" <>
Subject: Winter Solstice
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 1

Dear Jean,

This is to let you know about what we are doing at the House of Dhamma for
the global meditation link up at the time of the winter solstice. I hope
that you are well, peaceful and joyous and that you have a great time at the
turn of the century.

Yours in Living Light and Love,

Helen J. (Soliel)

December 22, 1999
Global synchronised meditation

Certain times are considered very auspicious times for synchronising
meditation, prayer, chanting and directed intention to promote Earth Healing
and peace. One of the most important of these times is the Winter (for those
in the northern hemisphere) Solstice, which occurs at 7.44 am GMT/UT (or
2.44 pm Thai time) on Wednesday December 22, 1999.
From 2 - 3.30 pm on December 22, 1999
there will be a group session to radiate Loving Kindness and Compassion (Metta and Karuna) to the Earth and all her children at The House of Dhamma
26/9 Lardprao Lane 15, Jatujak, Bangkok 10900


Dear media person

Yes! Another GMO document for your attention. If you care to read through this one, you'll see why the FDA is so corrupted and why there should be a Watergate-style inquiry into its decisions which are completely mangled by the ever-encroaching grasp and control of corporate lobbies.

Labelling poisonous foods - and now irradiated meat on top of it all in the US - but leaving the lethal substance on sale for the unconscious and stupidly trusting public to eat is blatantly criminal and a sheer masquerade.

How many millions of children will need to die an excruciatingly painful death from cancer before you guys in the media wake up and realize that by remaining silent about this you are not better than those who conspired to have their lucrative poisons approved by this fraudulent FDA?

And if you are not from the USA, how could you believe that the international reach of these megacorporations does not apply to your country's own food regulatory system?

The time to act is right NOW!

From Richard Wolfson's web site,

(Slightly edited. If you read no other posts, please read this
one. Robert Cohen's story played a big role in my lobbying the
Mass. legislature in 1997 in support of an rBGH labeling bill.

FDA Testimony by Robert Cohen

Robert Cohen was the final speaker on an FDA panel in
Washington on Tuesday, Nov. 30, 1999. Some of you may have
seen his speech on C-Span. Members of the panel included
Mildred Cody of the American Dietetic Association; Mario Teisl,
a professor of economics at the University of Maine; John Gray,
president of the International Food Service Distributors
Association; Kendal Keith, president of the National Grain &
Feed Association; and Richard Caplan, an environmental
advocate with the US Public Interest Research Group.

Cohen's Testimony:

Hi everybody, I've got to apologize first - I don't have a
prepared statement like the other panel members. All I'm going
to give here is some facts.

I have a copy of the Federal Register. It says here advertising
this meeting:

"FDA is not aware of information that will distinguish
genetically engineered food as a class from other foods."

[Mr. Cohen turns and addresses panel members.] I'm going to
give you some information today, guys.

The greatest controversy in FDA history was the approval
process for Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth
hormone. We shouldn't be here today! We should not be in this
room and I shouldn't be here because, in 1994, Congress HAD A
BILL that was going to require mandatory labeling of all foods
that were influenced by genetic engineering. I got my
Congresswoman to co-sponsor that bill - 181 congresspeople
co-sponsored that bill, and you know what? I learned how
Congress works that year because in 6 months they stalled the
bill -- 12 members of the Dairy Livestock & Poultry Committee
-- they stalled the bill until the 1994 session of Congress
expired and the bill died.

I was so upset, I investigated these 12 men and found that
collectively they took $711,000 in PAC money from companies
with dairy interests, and four of the members of the
committee took money directly from Monsanto.

Now we've got a lot of political intrigue and some real science
here ... We've got a combination of John Grisham and ... Stephen

Nikita Khrushchev said that what the scientists have in their
briefcase is terrifying [Mr. Cohen then opened his briefcase and
pulled out a stack of papers] -- and I've got some interesting
things in my briefcase to share with you today.

When Monsanto made their genetically engineered bovine
growth hormone, they noticed a couple of problems right
towards the end -- right before approval. They noticed that
laboratory animals were getting cancer, and they noticed that
cows were getting mastitis, ulcers in their udders. They were
putting more pus and bacteria into the milk. So Monsanto
arranged --

We've heard from Dr. Maryanski this morning, and Dr. Maryanski
talked about the Pure Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act but what he
didn't tell you was that in 1958, Robert Delaney, a congressman
from New York, added the Delaney Amendment which was
named after him. The Delaney Amendment stated that if a food
additive caused cancer, it was not to be approved - a pretty
good law - right?

-- Monsanto got their attorney, Michael Taylor from the firm of
King & Spalding --By the way, when they started in 1979, they
groomed their attorney who is now in the Supreme Court,
Clarence Thomas, from the same law firm--

Anyway, Monsanto's attorney, Michael Taylor, wrote and
minimized the Delaney Amendment- he wrote a scientific paper
that was published in the "Journal of Toxicology". Lawyers
--they write in law review journals, but this lawyer wrote in
the "Journal of Toxicology": "a De-Minumus interpretation of
the Delaney Amendment" became the new protocol, the new
standard operating procedure at FDA. They minimized cancer.

Michael Taylor was hired by the Food & Drug Administration,
and became the second most powerful man there. Monsanto's
attorney -- he wrote the standard operating procedure. In other
words, if you see cancer, ignore it. Margaret Miller and Suzanne
Sechen, Monsanto's scientists, were hired by the FDA to review
Monsanto's own research.

Margaret Miller knew cows were getting mastitis. The first
week at the FDA, December 3, 1989, she was given broad
power, and here's an effect of genetic engineering nobody has
considered. She knew cows were getting sick from the
genetically engineered hormone. She changed the amount of
antibiotics that farmers could have in their milk. She changed
it from 1 part per 100 million to 1 part per million - this is a
fact! She increased it by 100 times.

There is a hero of mine in the audience, Michael Hansen from
Consumer's Union. Consumer's Union tested milk in the New
York metropolitan area and found the presence of 52 different
antibiotics in milk samples.

FDA published on August 24, 1990, the first time ever in a
peer-reviewed journal, in "Science"... They published a review
of bovine somatotropin --bGH-- the genetically engineered cow
hormone. And in that review, there were seven tables of data.
Five of those tables came from one study authored by Richard,
Odaglia and Deslex. This is the famous "90-Day Study" [that has
been used as "evidence" that rBGH is safe]. Guess what? This
was actually a study lasting for 180 days and when I first
heard about this in 1994, I filed a Freedom of Information Act
Request for that study -- because I saw from the data that the
average spleen of a lab animal increased 46%.

I called FDA and spoke with Dick Teske. I said, "46%? You said
there were no biological effects!"

He said, "That's not statistically significant."

I said, "Well, let me see the raw data."

He said, "It's a trade secret."

I called Monsanto, they laughed at me. They said, "It's a trade
secret and you will never see it."

I'm smart, I filed a Freedom of Information Act Request, but I
didn't realize you can't find out the study. I went to Federal
Court, I said, "Your honor - spleen increase of 46%, that's
leukemia in 90 days!"

I met with FDA on April 21, 1995, and found out that this was
actually a 180-day study.

In Canada, they had this study. I have a letter here [Mr. Cohen
reaches into his briefcase], an internal memorandum:

"This is to advise you that the copies of reports, letters, etc.
for drug submissions have been stolen from my files."

This was stolen from a scientist's file in Canada. They stole
the second half of the "90-Day Study."

We've got real science here. I'm going to talk briefly about the
real science because when Monsanto made this hormone, they
had to tell the FDA -- they had to draw a chart of every amino
acid, the 191 amino acids. And when FDA wrote their paper in
"Science" magazine they wrote that one amino acid changed --
it was a different hormone than the naturally occurring one.

At the same time, somebody hired C. Everett Koop to come and
say that genetically engineered milk and the good old
wholesome milk is indistinguishable. Well, it wasn't.
Something happened to the hormone that Monsanto made. The
FDA said that there was one change in the endamino acid. It
became epsilon-N-acetyllysine. FDA had written if there was a
change in the middle of the protein, there could be disastrous
results. They cited Jerome Moore. I got Jerome Moore's paper. It
said if there is a protein change in the middle, there could be
Alzheimer's or sickle cell anemia or diabetes.

Four months after the hormone was approved, one of Monsanto's
scientists, Bernard Violand, published in the July 3, 1994 issue
of the journal "Protein Science" evidence that Monsanto made a

Oops! ... Monsanto created a freak amino acid. Monsanto
admitted it but didn't tell the FDA. [He turns and points to the
other panel members.]

Gentlemen, the hormone that's on the market today is different
than the one you [FDA] tested for seven years. Monsanto spent
$500 million, submitted 55,000 pages of information to you,
learned late in the process that they created a freak amino acid
-- that's what was tested on laboratory animals and it didn't
matter because FDA said to Monsanto, you know something? It's
safe because when you pasteurize milk, you destroy the

They performed this research up in Guelph, Ontario, by Paul
Groenewegan, and I've got his study. [He again turns to address
the panel members.] To this day, FDA thinks --it's on your web
page-- that 90% of the bovine growth hormone is destroyed by
pasteurization. But what Paul Groenewegan did --working with
Ted Elasser and Brian McBride, two Monsanto scientists-- was
he pasteurized milk for 30 minutes at 162oF, and when I read
that, I said, wait a second, milk is pasteurized for 15 seconds
at that temperature -- not 30 minutes. They intentionally tried
to destroy the hormone. They only destroyed 19% of it.
Somebody lied. And at that moment, FDA said to Monsanto:

"Because you destroy it by pasteurization, you don't have to do
further toxicology studies. You don't have to develop a test for
this hormone in milk. It's now safe to drink."

They [FDA] developed a zero day withdrawal [period for dairy
cows that had been given the hormone]. They determined it was
safe to drink.

We have a lot of political intrigue here. We have an interesting
situation where people have said that a revolving door policy
exists at FDA. I mean, where is the ex-FDA commissioner?
Guess who he is working for? He is working for Monsanto. Bob
Dole ran for President, his chief of staff was Donald Rumsfeld
(ex-president of Searle, owned by Monsanto). I have one last

[At this point, the moderator interrupts and tells Mr. Cohen to
wrap it up and to address labeling.]

I know, but we have a labeling issue here -- we have a right to
know. I have listened to comments about "multi-faceted
educational effort that we need" -- that's called brainwashing!
I don't want a "multi-faceted educational effort" -- I want a
double helical structure [audience applauds] on a piece of food
that I'm going to buy in the supermarket because I have a right
to know.

Because the bottom line is - mistakes were made and when I
hear from the American Dietetic Association, [he turns to a
member of the American Dietetic Association who had spoken
against labeling], I want to remind you that Monsanto gave you
$100,000 to set up a toll-free hotline about the bovine growth

Mistakes were made! We've got political intrigue here and the
bottom line is we have a right to know what we are eating.
Thank you. [Applause]

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999

News from Robert Cohen, who's on a hunger strike to publicize and urge
removal of rBGH from the dairy business and its effects from the milk
supply. (IN THE USA ONLY!)

In the past few days we've heard from someone, about a 1-1/2-year old girl
who had to have a kidney removed due to a Wilms tumor. We contacted
Robert about this, and he promptly replied with a citation to a study,
several years old, showing high levels of IGF-1, a hormone that is
elevated in milk from rBGH-treated cows, in Wilms tumors.

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999
From: "DEB News" <>
Subject: DEB NEWS: Read about the FDA's Oakland meeting tomorrow!

Dear Friends,

Three weeks ago I testified at the first of three FDA biotechnology hearings in Chicago.

Two weeks ago I was seen by many of you on C-SPAN, serving as an expert on
a panel at the second of three FDA hearings in Washington.

Last week I testified before the USDA in Washington.

Tomorrow is the third of three biotechnology panels.


At each opportunity, I presented evidence that MONSATAN (Monsanto) created
a "freak" amino acid when they manufactured the
genetically engineered bovine growth hormone (rbGH).

Fact is, they created five errors.

All of that information can be found at:

The world watched as we took our protest to the streets in Seattle.


"The United States would never knowingly permit a single pound of any
American food product to leave this country if I had a shred of evidence
that it was unsafe...."


Tomorrow, December 13 in Oakland, California (1301 Clay Street) FDA will
bear witness to the largest anti-biotechnology demonstration in American

I am proud to have played a small role in helping to plan this
demonstration. Watch tomorrow night's news, then send a message to FDA.

Do we have a right to know what we eat? That is what this
hearing is all about.

There should be a warning on every food containing a

***** gEnEtIcAlLy mOdIfIeD oRgAnIsM *****

There will be 1,000 demonstrators or more in Oakland!

Please send an EMAIL to the FDA ( saying that you
support Docket 99P-4613 demanding the recall of Monsanto's rbGH.

Come to the site and register your comment:

If you have not already joined us for one symbolic day of
fasting, please consider it to be a spiritual gift that
we will gratefully accept.

Robert Cohen


From: Debbie Ortman <>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999

CONSUMER WARNING - The Frankenfoods Fifteen (see list at end)


* Lab tests and industry disclosures indicate that 60-75% of all
non-organic supermarket foods now "test positive" for the presence of
genetically engineered (GE) ingredients.

* Despite growing public concern over the safety of milk and dairy products
from cows injected with recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), as well
as human health and environmental concerns over genetically engineered
corn, soy, canola, and cotton, the US government refuses to require
safety-testing or labeling for genetically engineered foods. As a result
Europe, Japan, and other nations are now refusing to buy many US food

* Mounting scientific evidence suggests that genetically engineered foods
may present serious hazards for human health and the environment. The
British Medical Association has called for a global ban on GE foods, while
the New England Journal of Medicine has warned that "the allergenic
potential of these newly intoduced microbial proteins is uncertain,
unpredictable, and untestable." Scientists warn that GE foods may set off
allergies, increase cancer risks, produce antibiotic-resistant pathogens,
damage food quality, and produce dangerous toxins.

* Environmental hazards of genetically engineered crops recently discussed
in scientific journals and the media include: increased use of toxic
pesticides, damage to soil fertility, genetic pollution of adjoining
farmlands, harm to Monarch butterflies and beneficial insects such as
ladybugs, and the creation of "superpests, "superweeds," and virulent new
plant viruses.

* Consumer polls over the past decade have shown that 80-95% of Americans
want genetically engineered foods to be labeled--mainly so that we can
avoid buying them. Fifty members of Congress recently sent a letter to the
Food and Drug Administration demanding labeling. In addition, a federal
lawsuit has been filed by a broad coalition of scientists, environmental
groups, religious leaders, organic farmers, and consumer organizations
demanding that all genetically engineered foods be taken off the market
until they have been properly safety-tested and labeled.

* Turn over this leaflet to see what you can do today to protect yourself
and your family from genetically engineered foods.


Ask your grocery store manager for a written statement on their policy
regarding genetically engineered foods. Request that they identify which
food products are genetically engineered and which are not.

Tell your grocer to offer a full-line selection of certified organic foods.
Organic farmers and producers operate under strict certification rules and
do not use any genetically engineered seeds or ingredients.

Buy certified organic foods from your local co-op, health food store,
farmers market or through a CSA - (Community Supported Agriculture)

Join the Organic Consumers Association and volunteer to help organize
opposition to genetically engineered foods in your local community. Keep
informed on genetic engineering and food safety issues by visiting our web
site at

Call the 15 companies listed below - The Frankenfoods Fifteen - and tell
them you will not purchase their foods or beverages unless they can provide
you with written
assurance that their products do not contain genetically engineered

800 452-1971
Heinz Foods
Healthy Choice
Quaker Oats
General Mills
Procter and Gamble

To Get Involved in your local area, write or call:
Organic Consumers Association/BioDemocracy Campaign
6114 Hwy 61 Little Marais, Minnesota 55614
Tel. 218-726-1443 Fax 218-726-1446
email <>
Web Site

To download this in a leaflet format/hard copy go to our website at,


Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999
From: "Cheryl A. Magill" <>
Subject: "What is it like writing an article about SURTASS LFA Sonar?"

"What is it like writing an article about SURTASS LFA Sonar?"

Veteran writers crumble under this topic. LFAS is damnably difficult to
write about. That's because the topic is so information-dependent.

Here's half the problem. The U.S. Navy's official Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (a document which is believed to be dangerously flawed
and full of deliberate omissions); states that there are no problems
whatsoever with deploying this new technology which we all know can damage
acousticly sensitive life for hundreds of miles. The combined low frequency
acoustic fiscal tally puts expenditures at over 400 million dollars to just
produce this faulty data which has omitted several of its own condeming
reports. Whereas, the stumbling environmental writer who challenges this
entire process is likely staying up late at night so as to work on sorting
through the Navy's erroneous data after working earlier on her day job.
But that's only half the problem.

Let's dive in to the deeper half. We're going under. Take a breath!

Every fact has to fit or what you write gets slammed by scientists who
claim the decibles can't be compared with the power output as between
single element versus multiple source arrays. And then, as a writer, if
you don't phrase the details about cellular disruption just right or if you
happen to mis-expalin tissue shearing and the damage caused by nitrogen
levels to the injured Navy divers, the medical types are all over you.
Just try writing about the history of LFAS and you'll find that the US Navy
fudged information contained in permit aplications by not being forthcoming
about the 1996 NATO deployment; wherein the Navy's Joe Johnson insists that
documentation was not peer reviewed; when in fact it was and wherein the
cause of death for 12 whales is conclusively determined to be due to LFAS
inspite of every international effort to re-write that truth. But just
call one dang thing "conclusive" and then the military technicians will
chime in that they've worked in sonar technology for 20 years and that the
well intended but ill-informed writer obviously never went on board a
submarine and probably couldn't even tell the difference between a
transducer unit and a receiver array. So there's no small coincidence that
some of the most effective writers have held a PhD degree as that's nearly
what it takes to communicate a clear opinion about some of these acoustic

But that's not necessarily sufficient to the task either. Because then
there's always the assorted handful of opinionated attorneys who will
debate executive orders versus Congressional mandates and the MMPA (Marine
Mammal Protection Act) against NEPA (National Environmental Protection
Agency) ruling # who knows what. And just when you're convinced these guys
aren't even sharing the same planetary solar dust as the rest of us,
somehow one of them manages to rescue sea turtles by having NMFS (National
Marine Fisheries Service) decisions over-turned thus bestowing hope that
there is light at the end of the long environmental tunnel. And just when
you think you've waded through the worst of the hip-deep flow of it all,
there's the influx of criticism from the well intended rabble rouser who
insists he can march right over to the Danzig household and sit down on the
front steps and settle this matter once and for all. You have to duck the
spurious remarks of an aerial surveyor who insists that he never saw whales
near the test site because he was paid not to look there for the first time
in how many years? A conflagration of Environmental Groups will offer
in-put and most are very helpful while others prove to be picky and manage
to stampede across detail after detail. Too, there is a group of marine
biologists who never go out on a limb and always get their paychecks on
time. Everything you might say to them will immediately be termed
"anecdotal" even when it includes hundreds of years of exprience all
expressed through mulitiple eye-witness accounts. Who else is looking
over your shoulder to make sure you get the information right? There is
the occasional UFO/USO investigator. A few church groups. The California
Coastal Commission. Congress. And let's remember that there is a group of
people who sincerely want to know why they feel a Minute-man compulsion to
defend American shores against the US Navy? It seems that the only groups
which have nothing to say... at least, according to the Navy's DEIS; would
be the business community as the US Navy has assured us that there will be
absolutely no socio-economic impact from ensonifying 80% of the world's


Now just cut that all down to 500 words. Throw in a reference to the
ever-increasingly global perception of the Taos Hum; mention weather
control in relation to the ambient bacground noise, toss in the word
"anthropromorphic" and you'll soon have a reasonable summary as to why
the Navy feels it can kill endangered ocean mammals to suit the convenience
of its own acoustic plans.

The technical nuts and bolts, the legal mumbo jumbo, the historic dates and
the known data sources all have to jive. It's a pain in the ass to write
about SURTASS LFA Sonar because we've had to thread together much of the
information from swatches of missing puzzle pieces which the Navy spent 400
million dollars to develop and then to keep people from finding out about
it. And just when you think you've donned this multi-colored coat and
studied the topic thoroughly, another mass stranding occurs and the local
people stand on the shore and say they could hear it rumbling through the
sands beneath their feet.


Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999
From: Jeni <>
Subject: Re: Bright Future Beyond the Y2Kurve

Jean, I totally agree with you . So many miracles of love are happening
and I believe we become what it is we focus on. We each have that power. this
is the biggest lesson of this millenium.


I think we have become too much of a fear based society and reacting
from that fear only creates more defensiveness in people. If I do the loving thing
for myself first then all unfolds as it should.

Love, Jeni

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999
Subject: Re: Bright Future Beyond the Y2Kurve

Dear friend and brother Jean

You were right. The post from our Sister Starhawk was certainly inspiring
and it brought me to tears in recognition of another Being of Light.

I am thankful for that post and it will posted in our On-Line Newsletter at <A
HREF="">Ancient Wisdom of the Maya Website<
/A>, with permission of course. (please respond)

I was reminded by her post of an event that took place in 1997. I met many
Mayan Elders in Mexico and one of them spoke with me, with great anguish,
begging me to take up their cause. At my own personal risk and peril I too
have espoused a cry in the wilderness. My Mayan/Aztec Brother Elders and
Sister Priestesses to this day are not allowed into the Basilica of Guadalupe
to perform their ancient rituals. Our Lady of Guadalupe is REALLY TONANTZIN,
Goddess of Earth, of Spring and Maize.
She was renamed Our Virgin of Guadalupe and that too was changed to Our Lady of Guadalupe.

When I returned to the United States I collected many signatures and wrote to
all participants from the United States and requested that they take up this
cry. Today many Elders are allowed to practice their ancient rituals at
Ancient Sacred Sites. It is indeed essential that we all unite in Spirit and
in Truth, with all our heart and all our mind and all our soul.

This Spiritual movement that WE ARE experiencing is indeed very much like
that movement which began with the simple message of one simple human being.
Like that time, the powerful ruling system will crumble and those of us who
have survived pursecution, torture and death will be reborn into a new era.
We can not deny that birth is chaotic and painful. But the child is always

May the Blessings BE!
In la'kech
Mary Magdalene of the Cross

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999
From: "Richard Vines, Jr." <>
Subject: food for the soul

The disciples asked the master to speak to them of death: "What will
it be like?"
"It will be as if a veil is ripped apart and you will say in wonder,
'So it was You all along!'"